Bill to legalize police sobriety checkpoints submitted

From Taxpayer Association of Oregon

Sobriety checkpoints may be coming to Oregon. State Senator Rod Monroe has issued Senate Joint Resolution 7 — a House-Senate partner resolution that brings to voters a constitutional amendment to authorize sobriety checkpoints. Senate Bill 352 is the implementing law if SJR 7 passes. Sobriety checkpoints brings a clash of civil libertarians and tough on crime advocates. It would amend Article I of our constitution which deals with unlawful searches. It raises the question on wether searching your car carries the same protection as searching your home or body.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 05:55 | Posted in Measure 37 | 8 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Steve Plunk

    While I understand the need to keep drunk drivers off the roads I cannot support this. If our constitutions need any changes they should be directed at increasing the power of the people over the state not increasing the state’s power.

  • Reper

    But what about people who are too danegroua to drive who are a threat to the safety of innocent people driving? Shouldn’t they be removed from the fastest roads in the state?

  • Angela

    It never ceases to amaze me how the Leftists in Oregon rail against the Bush police state, and then go on to create one of their own. Wake up, people! A police state is a police state, no matter who is in charge!

    • Rupert in Springfield

      Bingo – No surprise here, Rod Monroe is a Democrat, you will not hear word one of the police state talk about him.

      Leftists want a police state, that’s what they are about, greater government power, less individual rights. In fact that’s pretty much the definition of a leftist. This is why they are constantly trying to obscure what rights are. Its how we get “rights” confounded beyond the words meaning, such as “right to health care”

      Take away peoples 2nd amendment rights? – No Police state.

      Take away peoples property rights? – No police state.

      Take away peoples secret ballot rights in whether or not to join a union? – No police state.

      Tell people you didn’t think it was that big a deal to tap overseas phone calls? – You’re a Nazi.

  • Joe Shaddix

    So now, in addition to planning to sit in traffic on pothole pocked roads, I now have to factor in random road blocks by the police. I’m sure my boss will understand.

    Why don’t they just park outside the bar at midnight?

    • Reper

      Maybe they will do the checks during traffic jams to make best use of the time?

  • Rupert in Springfield

    Pretty scary. If you don’t think these checkpoints represent a certain invasion into a reasonable expectation of privacy, you probably haven’t been through one of them.

    Drunk driving is a problem, but so are a lot of other things that come up in our society. Half the drunk driving accidents I hear on the radio seem to involve someone who has been apprehended for the same thing numerous times before. You want to tell me it makes sense to start giving up rights because of lax enforcement?

    This is just more of the same from the usual crowd that seems big on enhancing government power and lax on individual rights.

  • provo

    One night of checkpoinst and inconvienance helps to lower accidents and injuries for the rest of the year. That is a good trade-off.

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)